FBI Scandal Update: Dossier Writer Christopher Steele Failed To Show Up For Court

Former British MI-6 Intelligence Officer Christopher Steele, who was paid $168,000 by Fusion GPS’ Glenn Simpson to write and promote the dossier funded by the Democratic National Committee was a no-show in a civil court case.

The multi-million dollar libel case has brought against Buzzfeed after the media outlet published the unverified disinformation dossier at Steele’s insistence. Steele was paid to promote the fake dossier among select journalists in a smear campaign against President Donald Trump.

According to reports from Fox News, Steele was a no-show Monday for a long-requested deposition in London. The news comes as Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Senator Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., have announced a criminal referral on Steele.

Evan Fray-Witzer, a Boston-based attorney representing Russian tech tycoon Aleksej Gubarev in multi-million dollar civil litigation, described Monday’s U.K. court actions to Fox News. “My understanding is that Mr. Steele’s lawyers spent a good deal of time arguing why they thought he (Steele) should not be required to sit for a deposition and that ultimately the court took the entire matter under advisement.” Gubarev is suing the British-based Steele’s company Orbis Business Intelligence because the dossier also smeared Gubarev’s companies which include XBT Holdings and Webzilla.  The dossier claimed the companies used “botnets and port traffic to transmit viruses, plant bugs and steal data.”   Fray-Witzer said, “Certainly with respect to Mr. Gubarev, Webzilla and XBT there has never been a single scrap of evidence about them in the dossier.”

As Fox News has reported based upon a review of British court records, Steele promoted and met with five media outlets repeatedly between the spring and fall of 2016.  At the same time, Steele was also meeting with the FBI in Rome, according to reports.

Records obtained and reviewed by Fox News from related civil ligitation in Florida reveal that Steele maintains that even showing up for a deposition would “implicate state secrets in London.” Fray-Witzer stressed in that hearing that the British government “has not asserted” Steele’s claims. The attorney has said Steele “is asserting he can’t speak about things.  We have pointed out that he’s spoken to anyone who is willing to listen, every journalist, and the FBI.” 

 

Court Says Cop Violated Constitution by Cuffing Tiny Child on Video, Watching Him Scream in Agony

A federal lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Children’s Law Center has finally made progress after a deputy sheriff handcuffed—and seemingly tortured—two small elementary school students who have disabilities.

In an extremely disturbing video, which TFTP reported on in 2015, school resource officer, Kenton County Deputy Sheriff Kevin Sumner, can be seen handcuffing a sobbing 8-year-old boy, referred to in court documents as S.R. The child is so small that Sumner has to lock the child’s biceps together behind his back. What makes the case even more appalling is that the child has a history of trauma and has been diagnosed with ADHD.

The other child named in the lawsuit, a girl named in the suit as L.G., was twice handcuffed in the same manner as S.R. She is a special needs student and has also been diagnosed with ADHD.

Neither child was accused of criminal conduct nor were they arrested or charged with a crime, but were being punished for behavior issues.

Advertisment

According to the ACLU, the lawsuit has finally been settled despite the sheriff disgustingly standing behind his deputy’s actions.

Months of discovery showed that Deputy Sheriff Sumner had handcuffed another young plaintiff twice and had also handcuffed up to 20 other children. Nonetheless, Sheriff Charles Korzenborn of Kenton County declared, “I steadfastly stand behind Deputy Sumner.” The sheriff also said, on the record, that handcuffing children behind their backs was an acceptable practice for his deputies.

Wednesday, reported the ACLU, the court disagreed. Federal District Court Judge William O. Bertelsman found that the handcuffing of these two children was “an unconstitutional seizure and excessive force.” Judge Bertelsman also found, as a matter of law, that Kenton County is liable for the handcuffings.

READ MORE:  Police Arrest Paraplegic Man For Considering Himself a Pedestrian

When did it become acceptable to treat students who misbehave or act out as if they are criminals? These were children—tiny ones—and they were treated and abused like prisoners of war.

According to the ACLU, due to the fact that this treatment is so commonplace, makes Judge Bertelsman’s decision is a significant win. Not only did the court find that the sheriff’s office was wrong, the judge reached this decision at summary judgment, issuing a decision on these issues before the case even went to trial.

At this stage, according to the ACLU the court has to give the sheriff the full benefit of the doubt — assuming that everything happened exactly as the deputy sheriff claimed. But even with this wide deference, the judge held the sheriff’s office liable and their actions unconstitutional. As Judge Bertelsman noted, even if SR swung an elbow at Officer Sumner, this “can hardly be considered a serious physical threat from an unarmed, 54-pound eight-year-old child.”

As tragic as this story sounds, it is sadly not an isolated one. Young children with disabilities often find themselves on the receiving end of police state violence while attending public school.

Colton Granito, an 8-year-old boy with autism, threw a tantrum during class. Instead of following the boy’s IEP plan, police were called. Colton was handcuffed, transported to jail, and forced to sit in a cell for hours wearing a straight jacket. He was subsequently charged with assault and sentenced to probation.

The photo below is of a 10-year-old child handcuffed, laid out on the back of a police cruiser. The boy’s name is Ryan, and he has autism. He misbehaved at school and was also arrested and treated like a criminal.

READ MORE:  Cops No-Knock Raid, Stomp Necks, Destroy & Nearly Burn Down Home-- To Find Broken Pot Pipe

In September of 2014, we reported on body cam footage showing a 9-year-old special needs boy handcuffed as his father pleaded with the officer to release him.

That same month, a highly disturbing video of cops manhandling a 13-year-old autistic child as he screamed for help emerged on Facebook.

And these cases contain only autistic children. If you truly want a glimpse into the horrid effects of the police state on all school children, take a scroll through our archives, at this link.

“The State represents violence in a concentrated and organized form. The individual has a soul, but as the State is a soulless machine, it can never be weaned from violence to which it owes its very existence.” -Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi

Second Mom in a Week Faces Possibility of Jail for Refusing to Vaccinate Her Child

Detroit, MI — Only days after Judge Karen McDonald sentenced Rebecca Bredow to jail for choosing not to vaccinate her son, another mother is facing the same potential fate. Lori Matheson is now facing the same court who, only days earlier, sent a mom to jail for refusing to vaccinate.

According to WXYZ:

Lori Matheson is objecting to a friend of the court order that found her daughter should get vaccinated.

She argues her family is pre-disposed to auto-immune injuries and a “23 and Me” genetic test will show that, and that the test should have been done before the referee made their determination.

The attorney for her daughter’s father says the daughter’s doctor recommended the vaccines and said her church allows them.

Matheson is now facing the same potential fate as Bredow and it’s all over the court’s decision to punish those who refuse vaccinations.

It is important to note that Matheson is not yet at the point to which Bredow had made it. Right now, she is only in court because she is choosing not to vaccinate their two-year-old while the father is.

The fact that this is the second case in only a couple of weeks, however, unfolding in the exact same manner, indicates where this could end up. It is indeed likely that the court will again side with the father.

Advertisment

Just like Bredow, the father in Matheson’s case, who does not have custody of the children, now wants to vaccinate his children to the fullest extent. Matheson disagrees, but the court has already shown that they couldn’t care less about what a mother thinks—despite Michigan law allowing for vaccine exemption.

READ MORE:  State Bill to Mandate Children to Receive Every Vaccine — Citizens Fighting Back

While vaccinating your children is certainly the decision of both parents — the idea of one parent being kidnapped and thrown in a cage for not wanting to vaccinate is the very fabric of tyranny.

“Why automatically side with the father that wants the vaccines? What about my choice as a mother?” said Bredow — and she has a point.

Judge McDonald noted during Bredow’s sentencing that the boy has two parents and “Dad gets a say.” However, if the roles were reversed, would the father be in a cage right now?

Now, as this second case unfolds, we will likely again see that it’s the dad that gets a say—just so long as he chooses to vaccinate.

Instead of punishing Bredow for refusing vaccines, why didn’t the judge simply grant temporary custody to the father and allow him to bring the child in to get vaccinated?

This decision by McDonald forecasts the potentially bleak outlook for Matheson.

In court, Matheson told the judge that outside of her concerns over potential health problems the vaccines may cause her child, that she religiously objects to vaccines because of their ties to aborted fetal cells.

“I started reading literature on vaccinations,” Matheson told McDonald. “When I started reading them that’s when I found out there are some vaccinations that are cultured in aborted fetal cells.”

Before you dismiss the rest of this article, know that there is, in fact, truth to that statement.

Some childhood vaccines, including the one against rubella — which is part of the MMR vaccine given to millions of children worldwide for measles, mumps and rubella — is cultured in “WI-38 human diploid lung fibroblasts,” according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s fact sheet on the vaccine’s ingredients.

READ MORE:  First Ever Study of Unvaccinated Vs. Vaccinated Kids, Pulled from Journal, Erased from Internet

Vaccine manufacturer, Merck, has publicly acknowledged that those cells were obtained from an electively aborted fetus.

“Merck, as well as other vaccine manufacturers, uses two well-established human cell lines to grow the virus for selected vaccines,” Merck said in a statement to ABC News. “The FDA has approved the use of these cell lines for the production of these Merck vaccines.”

According to the FDA, other common vaccines, including those for chicken pox, hepatitis, and rabies, are also propagated in cells originating from legally aborted human fetuses.

Naturally, if one is vehemently and religiously opposed to abortion, the idea of injecting a medicine into your child’s body that was originally created from an abortion, may cause some apprehension.

Regardless of your stance on vaccinations, the idea of a court being able to threaten jail for vaccine refusal is sinister and goes against any aspect of a free society.

A Federal Court Just Ruled Cops Can Go to Wrong House, Kill Innocent Homeowner and Walk Free

Lake County, FL — A disturbing precedent has just been set in a federal appeals court which ruled in favor of police who knocked on the wrong door at 1:30 am, failed to identify themselves, and then repeatedly shot the innocent homeowner until he died.

The homeowner, 26-year-old Andrew Scott had committed no crime when officers came to his home that night on July 15, 2012. Police were actually in search of a person they witnessed speeding on a motorcycle when they began banging on Scott’s door.

Deputy Richard Sylvester was the officer who saw the speeding motorcycle while on patrol. Sylvester initiated a pursuit but lost sight of it after the motorcycle sped off. For some reason, Sylvester believed the motorcycle driver was armed, might be wanted by another police department, and had been spotted at a nearby apartment complex, according to the police reports.

Sylvester, along with three other deputies, arrived at the apartment complex and began knocking on doors close to where the motorcycle was parked. They started with apartment 114 which was occupied by Scott and his girlfriend Amy Young who were playing video games and had zero connection to the motorcycle, the driver, or any illegal activity at all.

According to a press release from the Rutherford Institute, assuming tactical positions surrounding the door to Apartment 114, the deputies had their guns drawn and ready to shoot. Sylvester, without announcing he was a police officer, then banged loudly and repeatedly on the door, causing a neighbor to open his door. When questioned by a deputy, the neighbor explained that the motorcycle’s owner did not live in Apartment 114. This information was not relayed to Sylvester.

READ MORE:  Military device used on Detroit protest against Water Shutoffs

Clearly troubled by someone pounding on his door at 1:30 am Scott grabbed his legally owned pistol and went to open the door. When he opened the door, he was immediately startled by the shadowy figures aiming guns at him and retreated into the apartment. At this point, Sylvester immediately opened fire on the retreating man, firing six shots, three of which struck Scott, killing him.

“Drew and I loved each other and he died protecting me,” said Young.

A lower court ruled in favor of Sylvester and blamed Scott for legally protecting his own home with a pistol against overzealous and apparently trigger-happy cops who failed to identify themselves as such.

Scott’s family appealed the lower court’s ruling only to be shut down again. The US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ruled in favor of the police, yet again, that Sylvester was protected by “qualified immunity,” reasoning that the use of excessive force did not violate “clearly established law.”

The decision was split, with four judges dissenting with the majority’s ruling. In a strongly worded dissent from the judges, they noted the dangerous nature of this precedent.

First, under no standard was it reasonable for the police to kill Mr. Scott when he answered the knock at the door to his home. He was not suspected of any crime (much less a violent crime) and he was standing inside his own house without threatening them. Second, the police were not engaged in a permissible “knock and talk” when they killed Mr. Scott. Their aggressive tactics crossed far over the line from a consensual visit into a warrantless raid. When it upheld these rulings by the District Court, the panel (and now a majority of this Court) gave a pass to dangerous, unconstitutional police actions in a way that makes it more likely that tragic police shootings will continue to occur.

“Government officials insist that there is nothing unlawful, unreasonable or threatening about the prospect of armed police dressed in SWAT gear knocking on doors in the middle of night and ‘asking’ homeowners to engage in warrantless ‘knock-and-talk’ sessions,” said constitutional attorney John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute and author of Battlefield America: The War on the American People. “However, as Andrew Scott learned, there’s always a price to pay for saying no to such heavy-handed requests by police. If the courts continue to sanction such aggressive, excessive, coercive ‘knock-and-shoot’ tactics, it will give police further incentive to terrorize and kill American citizens without fear of repercussion.”

READ MORE:  Cop Quietly Given Back Job After Executing Handcuffed Man on Video

In the land of the free, those who claim they have sworn to protect you, can come to your house and kill you, and face no consequences. This is why police in America kill more citizens than anywhere in the rest of the world. This is why people protest. This is why people are angry.

Matt Agorist is an honorably discharged veteran of the USMC and former intelligence operator directly tasked by the NSA. This prior experience gives him unique insight into the world of government corruption and the American police state. Agorist has been an independent journalist for over a decade and has been featured on mainstream networks around the world. Agorist is also the Editor at Large at the Free Thought Project. Follow @MattAgorist on Twitter, Steemit, and now on Facebook.

Too Poor to Pay Fines: Town Forced to “Pay $680K For Running Debtor’s Prison”

This article was written by Jack Burns and originally published at The Free Thought Project.

Editor’s Comment: The state has turned its people into serfs once again, and through petty fines and regulations, everyone has once again come under the thumb. For the corporeally liberated, it is primarily a form of debt servitude, but for the poorest, who have nothing left to lose, it can mean jail time, sometimes for literally nothing more than getting caught up in a system of bureaucracy and unable to fork over more and more money for the process.

Town Busted Running “Debtor’s Prison” Must Pay $680K, Sheriff Told to Resign

by Jack Burns

Alexander, AL — The Southern Poverty Law Center has reached a $680,000 settlement in its lawsuit against the Alabama city of Alexander and its police chief Willie Robinson. The settlement was for depriving 190 of its residents their rights to due process (6th Amendment) and the unlawful seizure of their property (4th Amendment). Sheriff Robinson has even been asked to resign by lawyers representing their client.

Each one of the 190 individuals will receive $500 cash from the city for jailing them for being too poor to pay the fines imposed on them by the town. As reported by AL.com, “Hundreds of impoverished residents have faced unconstitutional and unjust treatment in Alexander City simply because they were too poor to pay fines and fees,” said Sam Brooke, in a press release. Brooke is the SPLC’s deputy legal director. He added, “The shuttering of this modern-day debtors’ prison, along with the monetary award, brings justice to many of the people who were unfairly targeted for being poor.”

The way the injustice flourished was as follows. A resident would receive a speeding ticket, for example. If they were unable to pay, they were arrested, taken to jail, and forced to remain there. While in jail, they would earn $20 a day for just being in jail, and $40 a day for doing laundry, cleaning, or washing police cruisers, until the total sum of the fine was paid in full. Each person was not allowed to go before a judge, nor to have a lawyer present to help in aid in their defense.

“Around 30 percent of Alexander inhabitants live below the poverty line. Plaintiff Amanda Underwood is one such person, who was jailed twice for not being able to pay her fines. Underwood previously earned $8 an hour and has two young children, according to the SPLC release. After not being able to pay a fine of $205 for a traffic violation, Underwood had to borrow money to secure her release. On a separate occasion, Underwood was fined $250 for driving without a license. She spent five days in jail working off her debt.”

What may have seemed like a quick way for the town to punish offenders — and settle long-standing fines, fees, and court costs — turned out to be a complete violation of Alexander’s residents’ civil rights. Underwood reveled in the victory saying, “I am glad the city is going to pay everyone who they jailed, to try to undo some of the harm they caused…I am so proud that this lawsuit has made a difference. I hope it will help many others, especially those like me who have been unfairly punished for being poor.”

Brooke said Alexander’s settlement out of court is just the latest in a string of successful lawsuits in Alabama which have made a positive impact on civil rights. “Courts are being sued and forced to change their procedures, and judges have been censured and suspended,” Brooke said. “And now a municipality has been forced to pay those it illegally jailed. We hope and believe all courts are now getting the message: It is unacceptable to punish the poor just because of their poverty.”

There’s very little difference between jailing someone to work off a fine, and selling one’s property to pay for such fines. One is a debtor’s prison and the other results in a debtor’s auction. In both cases, the police benefit from free labor and free revenue generation. Civil Asset Forfeiture (CAF) has been used for years to punish citizens accused of crimes such as drunk driving, driving with too much cash on hand, or being in possession of marijuana. Hopefully, with wins such as what the SPLC has been able to achieve in Alabama, more progress can likewise be made in CAF cases across the country as well.

This article was written by Jack Burns and originally published at The Free Thought Project.

Click here to subscribe: Join over one million monthly readers and receive breaking news, strategies, ideas and commentary.

Please Spread The Word And Share This Post

Author: Jack Burns
Views: Read by 136 people
Date: March 16th, 2017
Website: http://thefreethoughtproject.com/sheriff-town-pay-debtors-prison/

Copyright Information: This content has been contributed to SHTFplan by a third-party or has been republished with permission from the author. Please contact the author directly for republishing information.

Sheriff Tries to Expose List of 300 Bad Cops, Courts & Union Promptly Block Him

Los Angeles, CA — Domestic violence, bribery, theft, excessive force, brutality — these are just a few of the crimes committed by active duty sheriff’s deputies with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department. In total, there are 300 deputies with a history of misconduct who Sheriff Jim McDonnell thinks the public should know about. However, thanks to a protectionist court system and a powerful police union, the crimes of these cops may remain secret.

Having taken over one of the most corrupt sheriff’s departments in the country, McDonnell appears to be taking steps to increase transparency and foster public trust. But these steps are being met with heavy resistance along the way.

In 2014, McDonnell inherited a department in chaos.

In April of last year, former Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Undersheriff Paul Tanaka was convicted in connection with a sweeping, federal civil rights investigation of corruption and deputy-on-inmate abuse inside the jail system.

Tanaka, along with former Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca, and dozens of other deputies were exposed in a horrific abuse scandal that shocked LA County. In fact, Baca’s crimes were proven so grave in a civil suit, that he was found personally liable for $100,000, which he is to pay the victim directly out of his own pocket.

After seeing the breeding ground for corruption that McDonnell took over, it is no surprise his move to increase transparency is being met with such resistance. The years of corruption that fostered under Baca did not happen in a vacuum. It was allowed to grow out of control by a union and system that helped cover it up.

READ MORE:  Court Rules That Defendant"s Belief In The "Illuminati" Makes Him Unfit For Trial

To promote a more transparent and fair system of justice, McDonnell wanted to turn over the names and crimes of hundreds of problem cops to prosecutors, who can then add them to a database that tracks problem cops. This information can then be disclosed to defendants who may have been unjustly targeted by these cops.

After all, if a cop has been caught stealing from the department, beating an innocent person, or accepting bribes — their honesty on the stand should certainly come under question — especially considering the fact that their tainted testimony could decide whether or not an innocent person gets thrown in a cage.

However, according to the LA Times, the union that represents rank-and-file deputies strongly opposes providing the names to prosecutors and has taken the department to court. The Assn. for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs (ALADS) argues that the disclosure would violate state laws protecting officer personnel files and draw unfair scrutiny on deputies whose mistakes might have happened long ago.

Shortly after the Union noted their opposition, an appeals court sided with them by blocking the sheriff from sending the list of problem cops to the DA.

To be clear here, this list would not be a matter of public record, although it undoubtedly should be. It would only come up when the officer is set to testify against someone they accused of a crime.

As the Times points out, departments in at least a dozen counties, such as San Francisco and Sacramento, regularly send prosecutors the names of problem officers. Some, including agencies in San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Ventura have done so for well over a decade.

READ MORE:  SHOCK VIDEO: Cop Armed with an AR-15 Charges at Woman Filming Police, Smashes Her Phone

This process only helps to further the cause of transparency — but not in LA.

In 1963, the U.S. Supreme court ruled, in Brady vs. Maryland, prosecutors must turn over exculpatory, or favorable evidence to the defense to lessen the instance of faulty convictions. However, if this precedent in LA takes hold, the rights of the accused will suffer a dangerous blow.

Jerry Coleman, a special assistant district attorney in San Francisco County who teaches prosecutorial ethics at the University of San Francisco School of Law, told the Times that the ripple effects of such a failure can spread well beyond the courtroom.

“They affect not just our relations with police but our relations with victims, and the integrity of the criminal justice system entirely, and the public’s sense of honesty in the proceedings,” he said.

As for the court’s reasoning for keeping the criminal records of police officers secret — it could “create a negative stigma for the deputy.”

“The disclosure of a deputy’s name in conjunction with this list will create a negative stigma for the deputy,” Superior Court Judge James Chalfant wrote in his decision last month.

If the cop is accused of beating a handcuffed suspect, shouldn’t his ‘stigma’ be ‘negative’, especially given the fact that he was obviously allowed to keep his badge and gun?

“We’re not trying to hide anything that’s gone on in the past. The fact of the matter is, nobody wants to be wrongly accused of anything. That applies to everyone else in the world, so it should apply to deputies too,” ALADS’ president, Det. Ron Hernandez said.

READ MORE:  Police Dept Caught Giving Preference to Job Candidates who Said they Wouldn"t Arrest Fellow Cops

However, if these officers were wrongly accused, then their records should not have any marks on them.

To highlight the glaring double standard of cops and the people they police, consider what happens after a police-involved shooting. Immediately after a cop shoots someone, their previous criminal record is not only released but it is published by news outlets in an attempt to assassinate the victim’s character and publicly and without due process exonerate the officer.

At least in the case of prosecutors maintaining the list, these matters would be resolved in a courtroom instead of the comment sections of local news affiliates.

Just as police accountability attempts to take a half step forward, the blue wall of protection comes crashing down and sets it two steps back.

Matt Agorist is an honorably discharged veteran of the USMC and former intelligence operator directly tasked by the NSA. This prior experience gives him unique insight into the world of government corruption and the American police state. Agorist has been an independent journalist for over a decade and has been featured on mainstream networks around the world. Follow @MattAgorist on Twitter and now on Steemit

Court Rules That Defendant’s Belief In The “Illuminati” Makes Him Unfit For Trial

Chicago, IL — A suspect who was awaiting judgment in a terrorism case has been deemed unfit to stand trial because he believes that the court is controlled by the “Illuminati.”

Adel Daoud was accused of attempting to plant a bomb in downtown Chicago in 2012 when he was 17 years old. However, the plot was not conceived by him, he was allegedly coaxed by FBI agents, who encouraged him to take a fake bomb and plant it in the city. This case was among dozens of cases when the FBI encouraged individuals to plan false terrorist attacks.

According to Court House News, U.S. District Judge Sharon Coleman found Daoud unfit to stand trial for the third time based on his belief in reptilians and the Illuminati.

“This court has no doubt as to Daoud’s factual understanding of the proceedings against him. However, his rational understanding of the proceedings is significantly undermined by his pervasive belief that the court and the prosecution are members of the Illuminati and that his attorneys are Freemasons,” Coleman said in his statement.

“From Daoud’s own testimony as well as his letters to the court, it appears that his belief in the Illuminati, Freemasons and lizard people is sincere and escalating.  Undoubtedly, his lengthy pretrial incarceration, often spent in isolation and approaching its fourth year, coupled with the trauma of witnessing his cellmate’s attempted and then successful suicide, have only contributed to his mental issues,” Coleman said.

The judge ordered Daoud be placed in a psychiatric treatment facility until the court decides that he is fit to stand trial.

“If I’m crazy now, and I feel this is the best state I’ve been in, I had to be crazy forever,” Daoud said in court when his eligibility was being discussed.

Any human being, regardless of mental stability, should have the right to stand trial and defend themselves against accusations as serious as terrorism.

It is also important to point out that many of the failed terrorist attacks to occur in the past decade were actually set up by the FBI. Not only were they orchestrated by the FBI, but many of the suspects who were entrapped in these operations were mentally ill people, meaning that the FBI was reaching for low hanging fruit and setting up the easiest targets.

The following TED talk from Intercept journalist Trevor Aaronson details how the FBI has set up false terrorist plots to entrap mentally ill suspects who would have otherwise had no ability to commit an act of terrorism.

John Vibes is an author and researcher who organizes a number of large events including the Free Your Mind Conference. He also has a publishing company where he offers a censorship free platform for both fiction and non-fiction writers. You can contact him and stay connected to his work at his Facebook page. John is currently battling cancer naturally, without any chemo or radiation, and will be working to help others through his experience, if you wish to contribute to his treatments please donate here.